A Cambridge City Council website

Cambridge City Council

Council and democracy

Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Wilkinson Room - St John the Evangelist Church Hills Road Cambridge CB2 8RN. View directions

Contact: James Goddard  Committee Manager

Link: Video promoting the meeting

Items
No. Item

18/27/SAC

Welcome, Introduction and Apologies for Absence

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Councillors Adey, Jones, Page-Croft and Taylor.

18/28/SAC

Declarations of Interest

Minutes:

No interests were declared.

18/29/SAC

Minutes pdf icon PDF 299 KB

Minutes:

Councillor Thornburrow advised in relation to minute 18/24/SAC question 8 (iii) the number of inspections should be corrected to 1 in 10 rather than 1 in 30 therefore the minute should read. ‘There might be insufficient inspection of properties before they were handed over from developer(s), possibly only 1 in 10’.

 

The minutes of the meeting held on 4 June 2018 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

18/30/SAC

Matters and Actions Arising from the Minutes pdf icon PDF 150 KB

Minutes:

Pedestrian and Cycling conflict around entrance to Cambridge Assessment Centre

Councillor Thornburrow advised she had attended a site visit on the 21 June with Sonia Hansen, plus three others from the highways and cycling team. They also met with County Councillor Kavanagh. Three items had been agreed by the County Council but had not yet been done:

 

1) Slow markings would be placed either side of the Cambridge assessment and University press entrances to ask cyclists to respect these entrances and to be aware they exist. 

2) Look both way markings would also be placed on these exits to attempt to make those coming out of these exits that they should check each way before doing so. 

3) Solid white line would run along the maintenance track with “Beware of buses” every 100 metres to make all users aware that there is a live busway running alongside them.

 

One agreed item had been done to reduce the height of the timber fencing either side of the rear access to Cambridge Assessment.

 

Action: Councillor Thornburrow to follow up. 

 

Clearer signage on Coldhams Lane

Councillor Crawford had reported this issue to the Highways Team who were investigating.

 

Request to ARM to use an electric bus rather than diesel bus

Councillor McPherson confirmed that the Committee Manager had drafted a letter but he needed to sign and send it.

 

Action: Cllr McPherson to sign and send letter to ARM.

 

Tree branches near Robin Hood pub on Cherry Hinton Road

Councillor Crawford confirmed County Officers will look into this when the nesting season was over .

 

Councillor Thornburrow to help publicise SAC meetings by re-tweeting messages.

Councillor Thornburrow confirmed that a promotional video had been produced and published. She would continue to develop improvements to publicise SAC meetings.

18/31/SAC

Policing and Safer Neighbourhoods pdf icon PDF 570 KB

Start time 19:15

Minutes:

The Committee received a written report from the Maureen Tsentides, from the Safer Communities Team. Sgt Jim Stevenson gave a verbal outline regarding policing and safer neighbourhood work trends.

 

The report outlined actions taken since the last reporting period. The current emerging issues/neighbourhood trends for each ward were also highlighted (see report for full details). Previous priorities and engagement activity noted in the report were:

  i.  ASB on Guided Bus Way.

  ii.  Street begging – Hills Road.

  iii.  Mill Park – Open Space.

  iv.  Cherry Hinton Lakes – Trespass and dangerous behaviour in hot weather.

 

The Committee discussed the following policing issues:

  i.  The lakes adjacent to Cherry Hinton suffered from intrusion of members of the public who did not worry about litter or parking. Commented that Andersons were under a lot of pressure and asked the Police if they could speak with Peterhouse College to erect adequate fencing around the lakes adjacent to Cherry Hinton.

  ii.  Asked the Police whether they thought lighting on the guided busway would help to reduce crime.

 iii.  Asked for an update on the Police’s ICT issues.

iv.  Graffiti removal.

  v.  Robberies occurring on the guided busway.

vi.  The dispersal of street beggars in the city centre seemed to have moved street beggars to Cherry Hinton. Asked if there was a solution to break the begging cycle.

vii.  Resident witnessed attack on A1301 and guided busway.

 

Members of the public asked a number of questions, as set out below.

 

1.  A member of the public commented that he cycled the guided busway in the evening and that this had very low lighting. He also cycled from Addenbrooks to Trumpington Park and Ride. He had an exit strategy on Hills Road if he needed one and encountered any trouble but he had no exit strategy if he was on the guided busway.

 

The Police Representative commented that the guided busway was a big piece of Cambridge infrastructure, it was no less safe than any other major piece of travel infrastructure however appreciated that it could be improved.

 

2.  Commented that it was unsettling to see street begging outside the Tesco store in Cherry Hinton.

 

The Police Representative commented that this was a new issue to South Area because of the pro-active approach being taken in the city centre. The City Council had secured Injunctions against some individuals for street begging on Hills Road. Maureen Tsentides added that Injunctions could be varied; a Judge would only consider an Injunction Application to vary an Injunction Order if there was strong evidence in support of such an application. There would need to be evidence to establish whether the individuals begging outside Tesco’s were the same Individuals that were involved in the injunctions on Hills Road. The City Council would need to work with members of the public, businesses and the police to gain this evidence. The Council’s Legal Department would advise what further evidence would be required to pursue further action.

 

3.   There had been thefts in the Queen Edith’s ward in the last 6 -10 months. There was a new trend that criminals would steal car keys to be able to steal cars. He had taken this issue up with the Police and Crime Commissioner.

 

The Police Representative confirmed that due to improvements in technology, it was impossible to steal a car without the car key. Criminals would either try and clone car keys or steal the car key.  There was a Crime Prevention Officer who could provide advice on how to improve personal safety.

 

4.   A member of the public referred to the issue of trespassing at the lakes at Cherry Hinton and the impact on residents of St Bedes Crescent. He commented that people parked inconsiderately which meant that he was unable to get in and out of his driveway. A Housing Officer had advised him to build a barricade but the barricade he built had been taken and used as a bridge for people to access to the lakes at Cherry Hinton. He had telephoned the Police who had come round and moved some vehicles. He had emailed his local councillors but nothing seemed to happen.

 

The Police Representative commented that the long term solution would be to do something with the space. He appreciated that people parked anti-socially,  left litter and used resident’s wheelie bins to build bridges to access the lakes at Cherry Hinton. If a vehicle was parked to block a resident’s driveway then the police could assist to move the vehicle.  Unfortunately trespassing was a civil matter. The long term solution was not within police control. 

 

Action: Councillor McPherson to invite landowners around the lakes adjacent to Cherry Hinton to come to the next South Area Committee meeting so that members of the public can ask them questions. The Police confirmed that they will assist where they are able to do so.

 

The following priorities were unanimously agreed:

i.  ASB on Guided Bus Way and public areas in Trumpington village

ii.  Street begging – Cherry Hinton

iii.  Cherry Hinton high street – pavement cycling

 

18/32/SAC

Open Forum

Start time 19:45

 

Minutes:

Due to public interest in other items on the agenda no questions were asked during the Open Forum.

18/33/SAC

Transport Vision for Cambridge, Focusing on South Area Issues and Opportunities

Start time 20:00

 

James Palmer, Mayor of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough to outline the Combined Authority’s vision for transport in the south of Cambridge City, including bus services.

 

Councillor Lewis Herbert, Leader of Cambridge City Council will attend to represent the City’s transport vision.

 

Questions and answers (30 minutes).

Minutes:

The Committee received presentations from James Palmer (Mayor for Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority) and Lewis Herbert (Leader of Cambridge City Council) regarding transport vision for Cambridge focusing on South Area issues and opportunities.

 

Mayor Palmer outlined:

i.  There was pressure on housing in the south of the County.

ii.  It was important that the next generation were able to afford to live in Cambridge.

iii.  An Independent Economic Review due to be published on Friday set out the need for a Metro system in Cambridge. A high quality bus service would be required to move people around and get people to the Metro system. He wanted to move people from cars to use the Metro system.

iv.  He believed in a congestion charge for Cambridge but not before the Metro system was in place.

v.  The Metro system for South Cambridgeshire (and not just Cambridge) was estimated to cost £2.5 - 3 billion. To raise the finance to build the Metro system it was proposed to buy agricultural land and develop garden villages. Finance from these developments would be used to fund the Metro.

vi.  He commented that there needed to be links in areas of potential growth.

vii.  Most of the growth had been in the south of Cambridge. And problems arose when you tried to get around the city.

viii.  The timescale for delivering the Metro system was 2023-2029. 

ix.  He was working with the GCP to accelerate bus ways.

x.  His view of park and rides was that this moved travel issues to particular areas.

 

The Leader for Cambridge City Council outlined:

  i.  Cambridge was a transport destination.

  ii.  In the future the City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council would approve their Local Plans with some changes, one of which was more jobs at the Biomedical Campus.

  iii.  There were some imbalances in transport but the City Council was working with the GCP to address this.

  iv.  Expect will need transformational public transport offer.

  v.  The work on the Metro tunnelling was due in December and would clarify technical detail. He questioned how the project would be funded and where the Metro stations would be situated.

  vi.  He was a defender of bus services and cycling.

  vii.  The public report on the South East Cambridge route may make a major difference for people getting into and out of Cambridge.

  viii.  Commented that Stagecoach was not offering good bus services and people needed to be dissuaded from driving into Cambridge.

  ix.  He did not share Mayor Palmer’s view about park and rides. He also commented that there needed to be a shuttle bus between Babraham and Trumpington park and ride sites.

 

The Committee discussed the following issues:

  i.  Asked Mayor Palmer whether it was within his powers to encourage competition for bus operators.

  ii.  Had written to Mayor Palmer on behalf of South Area Committee to plea for local bus services.However when pushed for one route to be saved, this was to the detriment of another route.

  iii.  Wanted Stagecoach to stop deleting bus services without consultation.

  iv.  Commented that it was often the less privileged, elderly and women who were disadvantaged when bus services were cut.

  v.  Asked when the start time was for A1307 Cambridge South East Approach

 

Mayor Palmer made the following comments in response to Members’ questions:

  i.  A bus review was being undertaken, he had the power to franchise but he wanted to see the outcome of the bus review before making any decisions. A meeting with the Chairman of Stagecoach had been arranged.

  ii.  Commented that it wasn’t just Cambridge that suffered from poor bus service provision the rest of the county were also affected.

  iii.  The bus service review would look at all options, if voluntary charges were introduced this could make a substantial difference.

  iv.  If buses were more comfortable then more people may be likely to use them. People could not rely on buses to get them to and from work therefore a better system needed to be created.

 

Councillor Herbert made the following comments:

i.  Asked why bus tickets were not transferable and also commented that there needed to be a solution to raise significantly more money to improve bus services, air quality and reduce car journeys.

ii.  The main public transport into Cambridge was buses other than the train through Ely.

iii.  Confirmed that dates would be provided to South Area Committee for the quick wins under Phase 1 of the A1307 Cambridge South East Approach.

 

Following the meeting in response to the question regarding dates for quick win projects, the Project Manager at the GCP confirmed the following:

·  Safety improvements at Dalehead Foods were anticipated to be completed by the end of November.

·  Eastbound bus lane at Linton, completion by the end of January 2019.

·  Additional cycle storage and lockers at Babraham Park and Ride by the end of January 2019.

·  Upgraded signal controller at Linton Village College by the end of February 2019.

·  The remainder of Phase 1 will be completed by the end of the 2020/21 financial year.

 

Members of the public asked a number of questions, as set out below.

 

1.  Asked if there were any firm quantifications of the cost of sinking per mile for the Metro system and asked where would stations be sited, for example every mile?

 

Mayor Palmer confirmed that stations would be sited around 5 miles, £50 million for light rail, £120 million for stations and £10 million for stations outside of Cambridge.  

 

2.  Lived in Cherry Hinton was generally supportive of the Metro but expressed concerns around the financing of the system. He would like to see bus services delivered by communities. He believed that low cost fares were a strong encouragement for people to use buses.

 

3.  Believed in park and rides and saw the practical benefit. He had sent a letter to Mayor Palmer on 29 July but hadn’t received a response. Expressed disappointment regarding the Biomedical Campus.

 

Mayor Palmer commented that he opposed park and rides as they seemed to transfer vehicle movement issues to outside of the city. The road network could not cope with the number of vehicles; this was why he was proposing a Metro system.

 

Councillor Herbert commented that the Biomedical Campus had had faster growth than projected, the whole site needed to be looked at. The Addenbrooks site could be reconfigured. He believed in park and rides or else there would be no travel solutions for a decade. The Access Study was due to report in November 2018. He commented that people outside Cambridge needed to be encouraged to use bus services.

 

4.  Asked whether a review of bus services would make sure that less polluting buses were provided.

 

Mayor Palmer commented that he was in favour of low emission options and would do everything that he was able to do in the franchising option.

 

5.  Commented that discussions had focused on putting in housing and transport but there had been no discussions about providing facilities close to homes so that people could walk and cycle to them.  The local plan was due to allocate housing on Worts Causeway but no community facilities were being provided, these types of facilities could help bring people together to reinvigorate local communities.

 

Councillor Herbert commented that once the Local Plan was approved this would provide clarity.  Commented that this issue needed to be considered for the land north of Cherry Hinton.

18/34/SAC

Updates on Cambridge Biomedical Campus Transport Study and Related Projects

Start time 21:00

 

·  Peter Blake, Transport Director, Greater Cambridge Partnership

·  Jeremy Smith, Group Manager: Transport Strategy and Funding, Cambridgeshire County Council

·  Representative from Cambridge Biomedical Campus

 

This will be followed by an opportunity for questions from members of the public and South Area Committee.

 

 

Meeting ends: 10:00pm

Minutes:

The Committee received an update on the Cambridge Biomedical Campus Transport Study and related projects from officers of the Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP), Cambridge University Hospitals and Astrazeneca 

 

Jeremy Smith (GCP) outlined:

i.  The Biomedical Campus did a comprehensive travel survey every year.

ii.  30% of staff travelled by car, 70% used other modes of transport (of the 70% who used other modes of transport, 33% of staff cycled), patients tended to travel by car.

iii.  GCP looked to feed into the work that the Mayor was doing on the Cambridge South rail station.

iv.  He was aware of car parking issues and people parking on streets around the campus.

v.  Cycle parking was in high demand.

 

Peter Blake (GCP) outlined:

i.  Cambridge South East Transport Study, the project will be considered by the GCP Board in the near future to consider if an off-road solution was required.

ii.  Looking at city access and traffic signal movements to make it easier to move around the city.

iii.  Planning to bring a report in December on how bus services could be improved to make them more reliable and regular.

iv.  Residents parking issues, working with the County Council so can manage traffic and work with residents.

 

Katharine Smith (Cambridge University Hospitals) outlined:

i.  There were significant restrictions on staff parking to encourage staff to travel more sustainably.

ii.  There were over 3000 cycle parking spaces on site and a further 239 were going to be provided during September.

iii.  In the process of drafting a transport strategy.

iv.  They were reviewing opportunities for a shuttle service.

v.  They were mapping where staff lived to see where gaps in transport provision existed.

vi.  Discounted cycle purchase and season ticket loans were offered to employees.

 

Stephen Boni (AstraZeneca) outlined:

  i.  Had launched an employee travel policy called ‘My travel’ to reduce reliance on single occupancy cars and the demand for car parking.

  ii.  Wanted employees to be within 5 miles of a ‘travel hub’. 

 

The Committee discussed the following issues:

i.  In relation to Cambridge South Station, expressed frustration that there was a lot of discussion about the big picture but not a lot about the small stuff. Also commented that Ward Councillors were not being kept informed about the project and asked how a dialogue could be developed so issues can be addressed early for example with the guided busway and lighting it would have been easier to have had discussions before the development was undertaken as its harder to get lighting put in after construction.

ii.  Commented that people can travel by more than one form of transport and also commented that in providing good routes into Addenbrooks it would be useful if there could be more stops before buses get into the Biomedical Campus.

 

In response to members’ questions Jeremy Smith confirmed:

i.  Agreed it was better to get things (like lighting) designed in than trying to retrofit.

ii.  Agreed that more stops needed to be considered.

 

Members of the public asked a number of questions, as set out below.

i.   Asked whether the transport strategy was the same as the travel plan and if so when would it be adopted.

ii.   Commented that Cambridge South Station was a long walk from many of the buildings.

iii.  Commented that a lot of people who park in the park and ride, cycle to Addenbrooks and asked whether this had been captured in the statistics.

iv.  Commented that the route between Astrazeneca and Papworth was closed and asked when this would be open.

v.  Commented that big transport schemes took a long time to deliver but there were some quick wins which could be delivered which would get an extra 5-10% walking and cycling

vi.  Asked whether there would be enough room for the elderly and sick to park

vii.  Commented that the Addenbrooks roundabout had been redesigned and one of the pavements always flooded which meant that cyclists and pedestrians were unable to use it which rendered the roundabout useless.

 

In response to the public’s questions Katharine Smith said the following:

i.  The transport strategy was the same as the travel plan and there was a meeting the week after the Area Committee meeting to consider it.  The plan contained ambitious targets and there was a 5 year implementation plan.

ii.  There was an existing courtesy bus however Cambridge University Hospital was looking to see whether this service needed to be extended as there could be a link to provide a timely service to drop off patients and staff.

iii.  The travel survey would ask whether people walked and cycled and whether that was their main mode of transportation.

iv.  The pedestrian link would be open in October as there was further development needed; it was likely to be fully open in Spring 2019.

v.  Funds were being collated to deliver quick win transport solutions.

vi.  There would always be spaces available for patients and visitors who have greatest need.

vii.  Would look into the flooding issue at the roundabout.